2008/02/08 New York
A puzzling incident
September 6, 2007
Seymour M. Hersh writes in this week’s New Yorker about the Israeli bombing attack on a Syrian facility of September 6, 2007. See also my entry of
According to Hersh Israel might have attacked a nuclear facility, or a chemical warfare facility or just nothing. In which case the attack was meant as a warning to Iran and to try out a Russian air-defense-system that is also being used by the Iranians.
It seems to me that Hersh thinks the last possibility is the most probable.
Hersh does not provide an answer why the Syrian reaction to this attack has been so low-key. Why for that matter the whole Arab world chose to ignore this incident.
[ Add comment ]
2 comments 
Maybe silence, because it was an attack on a sensible (military) target, and defeat is nothing to be proud of. In case of civilian casualties, it would have been a different matter, I think.
Yes, indeed:
Avoiding conflict is an important task in life ( your last sentence in your last topic: Did you vote?). But then, surrounded by an ocean full of enemies on one side and the medditerenian on the other it is more improtant to show 'em you're awake, vigilant & , well, willing to strike back/first. Diplomacy has its shortcomings, doesn't it.[ Add comment ]
